PCS academy

HanDomi said:

So you are saying you would give him 100 PCS ? Because TES is I think his total max for this layout

Click to expand...

We all know PCS inflations so I don't take his PCS seriously. If it were me, PChan's PCS is just 90-92 at most when he is clean, and when he fell I would say 84-87.
Other top guys:85-88 at most when they are clean, and 80-83 when they fall.

Why? Make a case

gkelly said:

Why? Make a case

Click to expand...

I would just say, with my limited knowledge that from 93-100 PCS, you need to be as refined as the top ice dancers. Like V/M or D/W. 100? You need the best ice dancers with the performance of their lives.

I think PChan is one of the most refined skaters, I and do think his programs, when they are clean, deserve 90PCS. But I don't think he is as refined as the ice dancers in this particular field. So 92 PCS is my maximum score for PChan's PCS when he is clean.

And I see other top guys are not at the level of PChan's skating skills. But when they are clean, they are not that far behind, especially Daisuke Takahashi, I would give Dai 90 PCS or even 92 when he is clean and lands all the jump safety without any UR.

Mathman said:

This program meets all IJS criteria for interpretation. Michelle Kwan (age 15), Romanza, 1886 worlds SP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q

Click to expand...

Umm...

@Meoima
Actually, while it varies by program/performance, I'd give Dai higher PCS than Patrick a lot of the time. While Patrick's Skating Skills are better, Dai blows him away in P/E and Interpretation Timing, has more distinct Choreography, and at least matches him in Transitions.

Maybe the two of us should mark their 2012 Worlds performances in PCS, and see what we come up with? I will say, for the record, I do think Patrick deserved the win, but I wouldn't give him higher PCS than Dai.

Sandpiper said:

@Meoima
Actually, while it varies by program/performance, I'd give Dai higher PCS than Patrick a lot of the time. While Patrick's Skating Skills are better, Dai blows him away in P/E and Interpretation Timing, has more distinct Choreography, and at least matches him in Transitions.

Maybe the two of us should mark their 2012 Worlds performances in PCS, and see what we come up with? I will say, for the record, I do think Patrick deserved the win, but I wouldn't give him higher PCS than Dai.

Click to expand...

I think so, too. But Dai usually got UR calls on his quads (while PChan's jumps, except the axel are more reliable). So if they are both clean, without any UR and falls, I would give them the same PCS. The things is, Dai has more shaky landings than PChan, due to his knee's problem so it affects his PCS overall I think. If they were at the same age, and at their peak at the same time, I would say Dai edge out PChan in many ways.

As for Worlds 2012, I think Dai should have won overall since he didn't skate behind the music and not a fall in his FS. I think music violation and falls should have more deduction.

gkelly said:

Off topic, but, something like this?

Click to expand...

Yes, thanks for sharing. That is, as Dick said, a very difficult move. I wish more skaters would give it a try.

@Meoima
Maybe my eyes are just bad, but URs don't impact a program for me. I'm all for lowering PCS for sloppy programs, but I can't see URs unless I examine every jump very closely. So unless Dai steps-out/two-foots (which he has done, but Patrick also has step-outs), I'd give him higher PCS even if he URs a jump or two. (I don't mean to say he'd deserve to win even with URs, but I'd have Patrick win on the technical score, not PCS).

Heck, even if they're both 100% clean (no URs), doing the same jumps, and I give Dai higher PCS, that doesn't guarantee he wins. His jumps don't pull the same GOE as Patrick's, since they're somewhat on the small side for a top skater. But that probably goes into GKelly's GOE Academy.

Since we're focusing on the Interpretation component right now -- for those of you who have posted favorite programs, would you say that this performance is as good as it gets in your opinion? Your standard for 10.0 on Interpretation? If not quite 10.0, what more would you need to see (or hear, I guess) to give a perfect Interpretation score?

How would you help someone who doesn't love this performance as much as you do to see what you love about the skater's interpretation?

Sandpiper said:

Maybe my eyes are just bad, but URs don't impact a program for me.

Click to expand...

To me, a slight under-rotation represents "opportunity loss." If you don't get complete rotation you cannot smoothly extend and control the landing edge -- as shown on this double Axel from 1886

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=1m52s

Mathman said:

To me, a slight under-rotation represents "opportunity loss." If you don't get complete rotation you cannot smoothly extend and control the landing edge -- as shown on this double Axel from 1886

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q#t=1m52s

Click to expand...

Skaters already get BV and GOE reduction for URs. I really can't get behind punishing them (Dai in this case) in PCS too when URs are already overpunished compared to falls.

Mathman said:

T

This program meets all IJS criteria for interpretation. Michelle Kwan (age 15), Romanza, 1886 worlds SP.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1imuQWeIi4Q

Click to expand...

I know Michelle is getting older, but 1886?

Seriously, Romanza is an exquisite performance in every way, with musicality that even most "mature" skaters only dream of. One of her very best, IMO -- right up there with Lyra Angelica.

Sandpiper said:

Skaters already get BV and GOE reduction for URs. I really can't get behind punishing them (Dai in this case) in PCS too when URs are already overpunished compared to falls.

Click to expand...

That's why I used the language "opportunity loss." You don't punish anyone, it's just that he missed the opportunity to score even higher (by presenting a beautifully controlled flowing edge, right in time with, and in character with, the music).

A fall is the same thing. If you fall, you are not marked down in PCS but you might miss out on the opportunity to interpret the music to its fullest.

The commentary on the Jackson video is too intrusive for me to be able to hear the music and evaluate how well the skater interprets it.

The Cranston one is great for this purpose since there's no commentary over the music.

Interpretation criteria for singles skaters:
*Effortless movement in time to the music (timing)
*Expression of the music's style, character and rhythm
*Use of finesse to reflect the nuances of the music

Allowing for the possibility that the audio and video are not perfectly synched on the youtube clip...

My general comment is that often the movement was right on the music, note for note, beat by beat.

Occasionally, especially in the opening section, it followed the general mood and style, even the forward momentum, of the musical line, but the downbeats or phrasing of the movement didn't match up with the downbeats and phrasing of the music -- a new phrase might start where Cranston was still in the middle of a spin or the previous movement phrase, or he'd start a new movement phrase before the musical phrase had concluded.

A few times, the music was doing something interesting and Cranston was just taking a few strokes in his own rhythm.

He was really into this performance physically, really over his skates and put a lot of energy into it throughout. Although my first thought isn't "wow that looks effortless," I never felt that it was labored or effortful -- I'd give good credit for the "effortless movement" part of the first bullet point and note that the "in time to the music part" was usually quite good.

The movement style for each section of the program matched the style of the music very well. He hit a lot of big accents in the music with big gestures or jumps, although there was one musical flourish early on that seemed to call for an arm or leg gesture and was pretty much ignored.

He hit the beginnings and endings of larger sections very clearly.

There were a lot of nuances of movement matching musical nuances, including some spin entries and position changes. I especially enjoyed the way the butterfly-knee spin at the very end went with the music. But that made the few missed opportunities perhaps more disappointing than with a skater from whom I would expect less.

All in all, I'm thinking that the expression of the idea of each musical section was Outstanding, but because of a few lapses in rhythm and a few missed nuances I'd consider those aspects only Very Good. Credit for choosing music that demands precision and living up to it so often. So I might go with an Interpretation score in the 9.0 range.

Mathman said:

That's why I used the language "opportunity loss." You don't punish anyone, it's just that he missed the opportunity to score even higher (by presenting a beautifully controlled flowing edge, right in time with, and in character with, the music).

A fall is the same thing. If you fall, you are not marked down in PCS but you might miss out on the opportunity to interpret the music to its fullest.

Click to expand...

So should Dai's PCS be "lower than they otherwise would be" because he had one UR? While UR is a problem, I think the PCS hit for UR should be negligible compared to falls. URs are often so borderline anyway--are people going to explain away Mao's Saitama PCS being lower than Carolina's because Mao had URs? (I probably don't need to answer, but: No. The PCS scores were ridiculous and simply used to keep Carolina afloat. Whether you think she deserved bronze or not--and I'm personally "okay" with her bronze--there's no way to justify those PCS).

gkelly said:

Cool!

I'll do some analysis after I get home from work tonight.

In case anyone else wants to join in, here are some other great Canadian champion men's performances to analyze, starting with Interpretation.

Of course it's not fair to compare programs from different eras, with different rules, in terms of TES or who would have won if they were competing against each other. But I do think it can be meaningful to look at 6.0 programs in terms of the program components, with 2014 eyes.

These are all great skaters in their own ways, so we would expect high scores in general. But how good do we think they were they specifically at Interpretation, as defined in the criteria listed above, in these particular performances?

Donald Jackson 1962

Toller Cranston 1974

Brian Orser 1987

Kurt Browning 1990

Elvis Stojko 1995

Jeff Buttle 2008

Click to expand...

I do not know nearly enough to comment on the PCS, but thank you so much for this! I had never heard of Donald Jackson, and what a wonderful performance. For me, for the time and place, (and although alive, I was sadly too young to have been watching), far more compelling than PChiddy's will-he-or-won't he splat.

But OMG even 50 years ago, Carmen?

I watched the Kurt Browning video earlier and it was a solid skate in terms of Interpretation. There were moments that seemed a bit too manufactured for my taste(weird leg lifts) but all were done to fit the music. I usually find one moment in a performance and use it as a pinnacle so to speak. Whether its a good moment or a tragic one. I then formulate and add or subtract from there. This is probably an inefficient way to score a criterion but whatever....I'm not a trained judge.

For me the pinnacle or stand out moment was right after he landed his huge and lofty 2A-1L-3S. He transitioned out right in character and displayed complete control over the program. He later did a 3a-2L and had similar if not smoother transition back into the program. While these are more likely better suited as transition marks the way he used his arms and displayed such confidence sold me as to his interpretation of the music and the feelings of it. It helped that it was right in time to the music. Plus I think certain aspects in judging are ok to count movements or expression in multiple catagories. I mean if you do a spin in time with the music you can score your TES,INT, and Execution all in the same element...IMO at least. I think certain spins can and should count toward SS also but we'll probably get to that later.

Speaking of spins....Another moment that stuck out was what I believe to be a flying camel spin that had a fast jump into it but landed it squarely and rotated at slower speed than I expected. It helped accent the music too. I guess to me interpretation is control over the program and the ability to use your skating to become the music or showcase it.

On a side note this type of music kind of leaves me cold. If I don't want to listen to it in my car or while running..etc etc...it kind of harms my personal connection. Sorry but that's how I feel. That said....he interpreted it very well and I can't take points away for not liking the music.

Final COP score for INT: 9.25

I don't think I would ever give a 10 but this is only a couple notches short of 9.75 and I think that's fair....in this day and age at least.

Meoima said:

My favorite program of PChiddy, except the fall: http://youtu.be/7dBI6kQ4riM

Click to expand...

This is the same program without fall. It's almost perfect: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZFcnmMql-U